[Paul[_13_]]

http://www.musiciansfriend.com/pro-audio/behringer-b212xl-12-800w-passive-titanium-pa-speaker?cntry=us&source=3WWRWXGP&gclid=CMPBlYPmkdI CFRBEfgodFm0LDg&kwid=productads-adid^156717928496-device^c-plaid^140858496021-sku^580025000000000@ADL4MF-adType^PLA#reviews


Good sound, or P.O.S.?

[gareth magennis]

"Paul" wrote in message news


http://www.musiciansfriend.com/pro-audio/behringer-b212xl-12-800w-passive-titanium-pa-speaker?cntry=us&source=3WWRWXGP&gclid=CMPBlYPmkdI CFRBEfgodFm0LDg&kwid=productads-adid^156717928496-device^c-plaid^140858496021-sku^580025000000000@ADL4MF-adType^PLA#reviews


Good sound, or P.O.S.?






Paul, you will hear a lot of **** from people whose gut response is to hate
Behringer. Do not listen to these people.

Behringer is there, at a price, and a performance, that is well worth
considering, IMHO.
At the end of the day you get what you pay for, unless you shop for no name
brands on Ebay etc when you will get fleeced.

I don't think you'll be disappointed with the Behringers - you could spend
a lot more and get much nicer speakers such as a couple of EV's, or spend
considerably more on a pair of RCF or QSC's, but I dont think you want to do
that just now.


Cheers,

Gareth.

[Scott Dorsey]

Gareth Magennis wrote:

Paul, you will hear a lot of **** from people whose gut response is to hate
Behringer. Do not listen to these people.

Well, you'll hear two kinds of ****:

First of all you'll hear people who complain about the quality of Behringer
products, and I personally can't say much either way about that. As far as
I can tell they make some decent stuff at a price point and they make some
very poor stuff at a price point too. You could say the same about a lot
of manufacturers.

But secondly, you'll hear people who complain about a lot of unsavory
business practices that Behringer engaged in 25 years ago when he was
first getting started. I think those are worth listening to. You can
decide for yourself how to respond. Some people take the attitude that
these things happened a long time ago and the company is very different
now, which is true. Some people take that attitude that even though those
thigns happened a long time ago, the same people are still in charge, which
is also true.

I don't think you'll be disappointed with the Behringers - you could spend
a lot more and get much nicer speakers such as a couple of EV's, or spend
considerably more on a pair of RCF or QSC's, but I dont think you want to do
that just now.

I haven't used those Behringers. I haven't been very impressed with their
small PA stacks, but then again I haven't been impressed with much else at
that price point either.
--scott


--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Paul[_13_]]

On 2/16/2017 4:42 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Gareth Magennis wrote:

Paul, you will hear a lot of **** from people whose gut response is to hate
Behringer. Do not listen to these people.

Well, you'll hear two kinds of ****:

First of all you'll hear people who complain about the quality of Behringer
products, and I personally can't say much either way about that. As far as
I can tell they make some decent stuff at a price point and they make some
very poor stuff at a price point too. You could say the same about a lot
of manufacturers.

But secondly, you'll hear people who complain about a lot of unsavory
business practices that Behringer engaged in 25 years ago when he was
first getting started.

Unsavory practices? Like what, out of curiosity?



I think those are worth listening to. You can
decide for yourself how to respond. Some people take the attitude that
these things happened a long time ago and the company is very different
now, which is true. Some people take that attitude that even though those
thigns happened a long time ago, the same people are still in charge, which
is also true.

I don't think you'll be disappointed with the Behringers - you could spend
a lot more and get much nicer speakers such as a couple of EV's, or spend
considerably more on a pair of RCF or QSC's, but I dont think you want to do
that just now.

I haven't used those Behringers. I haven't been very impressed with their
small PA stacks, but then again I haven't been impressed with much else at
that price point either.
--scott

[geoff]

On 17/02/2017 11:27 PM, Paul wrote:


Unsavory practices? Like what, out of curiosity?

Totally ripping off the Mackie 8-Bus, right down to cosmetics.

geoff

[Scott Dorsey]

In article , Paul wrote:
On 2/16/2017 4:42 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Gareth Magennis wrote:

Paul, you will hear a lot of **** from people whose gut response is to hate
Behringer. Do not listen to these people.

Well, you'll hear two kinds of ****:

First of all you'll hear people who complain about the quality of Behringer
products, and I personally can't say much either way about that. As far as
I can tell they make some decent stuff at a price point and they make some
very poor stuff at a price point too. You could say the same about a lot
of manufacturers.

But secondly, you'll hear people who complain about a lot of unsavory
business practices that Behringer engaged in 25 years ago when he was
first getting started.

Unsavory practices? Like what, out of curiosity?

Duplicating Aphex exciters so precisely that they left the Aphex logo on the
new PC boards they made, for instance.

To a much lesser extent, copying much of the design of the Mackie 1604 part
for part. That wasn't anywhere near as blatant, especially since there really
was nothing innovative about the 1604 electronics per se.

But sheesh, if you're going to copy the 1604, at least increase the value
of that feedback capacitor in the mike preamp so the low end response doesn't
change when you adjust the trims....
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On 17 Feb 2017 09:32:02 -0500, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

In article , Paul wrote:
On 2/16/2017 4:42 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Gareth Magennis wrote:

Paul, you will hear a lot of **** from people whose gut response is to hate
Behringer. Do not listen to these people.

Well, you'll hear two kinds of ****:

First of all you'll hear people who complain about the quality of Behringer
products, and I personally can't say much either way about that. As far as
I can tell they make some decent stuff at a price point and they make some
very poor stuff at a price point too. You could say the same about a lot
of manufacturers.

But secondly, you'll hear people who complain about a lot of unsavory
business practices that Behringer engaged in 25 years ago when he was
first getting started.

Unsavory practices? Like what, out of curiosity?

Duplicating Aphex exciters so precisely that they left the Aphex logo on the
new PC boards they made, for instance.

To a much lesser extent, copying much of the design of the Mackie 1604 part
for part. That wasn't anywhere near as blatant, especially since there really
was nothing innovative about the 1604 electronics per se.

But sheesh, if you're going to copy the 1604, at least increase the value
of that feedback capacitor in the mike preamp so the low end response doesn't
change when you adjust the trims....
--scott

Why is everyone so fixated on what a company did years ago? Most
startups have a little dirt under their nails. It no longer matters. I
have a Behringer mixer here. Sonically it is transparent. Functionally
it does exactly what I require. It has an exemplary ADC/DAC. The power
supply is crap and won't stand up to being switched on long term. So I
turn it off when I'm done.

d

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

[Scott Dorsey]

Don Pearce wrote:

Why is everyone so fixated on what a company did years ago? Most
startups have a little dirt under their nails. It no longer matters. I
have a Behringer mixer here. Sonically it is transparent. Functionally
it does exactly what I require. It has an exemplary ADC/DAC. The power
supply is crap and won't stand up to being switched on long term. So I
turn it off when I'm done.

Because the same guy who was in charge when it was a three-man operation
doing that kind of stuff is still in charge today.

It bothers some people. It doesn't bother everyone.
--scott


--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On 17 Feb 2017 13:27:20 -0500, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:

Why is everyone so fixated on what a company did years ago? Most
startups have a little dirt under their nails. It no longer matters. I
have a Behringer mixer here. Sonically it is transparent. Functionally
it does exactly what I require. It has an exemplary ADC/DAC. The power
supply is crap and won't stand up to being switched on long term. So I
turn it off when I'm done.

Because the same guy who was in charge when it was a three-man operation
doing that kind of stuff is still in charge today.

It bothers some people. It doesn't bother everyone.


If everybody in the music business was this fussed about some copying
- there wouldn't be a music business. Did you teach yourself to mix in
isolation, or did you look over someone's shoulder when you were
learning?

d

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

[Paul[_13_]]

On 2/17/2017 11:36 AM, Don Pearce wrote:
On 17 Feb 2017 13:27:20 -0500, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:

Why is everyone so fixated on what a company did years ago? Most
startups have a little dirt under their nails. It no longer matters. I
have a Behringer mixer here. Sonically it is transparent. Functionally
it does exactly what I require. It has an exemplary ADC/DAC. The power
supply is crap and won't stand up to being switched on long term. So I
turn it off when I'm done.

Because the same guy who was in charge when it was a three-man operation
doing that kind of stuff is still in charge today.

It bothers some people. It doesn't bother everyone.


If everybody in the music business was this fussed about some copying
- there wouldn't be a music business. Did you teach yourself to mix in
isolation, or did you look over someone's shoulder when you were
learning?


Some people are autodidacts, and some learn better from others.

Reverse-engineering a successful design from your competition
is nothing new. It happens EVERYWHERE in EVERY field of endeavor!

People copy and steal successful designs and ideas in electronics,
painting, music, dance, architecture, automobile design, movies, etc,
etc.....especially when they are starting out, or a company is new.

It's how we learn from each other.

And then when you can IMPROVE on someone else's design, and
make it your own...then YOU become the innovator!

[PStamler]

On Friday, February 17, 2017 at 1:20:25 PM UTC-6, Paul wrote:
On 2/17/2017 11:36 AM, Don Pearce wrote:
On 17 Feb 2017 13:27:20 -0500, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:

Why is everyone so fixated on what a company did years ago? Most
startups have a little dirt under their nails. It no longer matters. I
have a Behringer mixer here. Sonically it is transparent. Functionally
it does exactly what I require. It has an exemplary ADC/DAC. The power
supply is crap and won't stand up to being switched on long term. So I
turn it off when I'm done.

Because the same guy who was in charge when it was a three-man operation
doing that kind of stuff is still in charge today.

It bothers some people. It doesn't bother everyone.


If everybody in the music business was this fussed about some copying
- there wouldn't be a music business. Did you teach yourself to mix in
isolation, or did you look over someone's shoulder when you were
learning?


Some people are autodidacts, and some learn better from others.

Reverse-engineering a successful design from your competition
is nothing new. It happens EVERYWHERE in EVERY field of endeavor!

People copy and steal successful designs and ideas in electronics,
painting, music, dance, architecture, automobile design, movies, etc,
etc.....especially when they are starting out, or a company is new.

It's how we learn from each other.

And then when you can IMPROVE on someone else's design, and
make it your own...then YOU become the innovator!

Or as folklorist Charles Seeger put it, "Plagiarism is basic to culture."

Peace,
The Other Paul

[Paul[_13_]]

On 2/17/2017 1:58 PM, PStamler wrote:
On Friday, February 17, 2017 at 1:20:25 PM UTC-6, Paul wrote:
On 2/17/2017 11:36 AM, Don Pearce wrote:
On 17 Feb 2017 13:27:20 -0500, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:

Why is everyone so fixated on what a company did years ago? Most
startups have a little dirt under their nails. It no longer matters. I
have a Behringer mixer here. Sonically it is transparent. Functionally
it does exactly what I require. It has an exemplary ADC/DAC. The power
supply is crap and won't stand up to being switched on long term. So I
turn it off when I'm done.

Because the same guy who was in charge when it was a three-man operation
doing that kind of stuff is still in charge today.

It bothers some people. It doesn't bother everyone.


If everybody in the music business was this fussed about some copying
- there wouldn't be a music business. Did you teach yourself to mix in
isolation, or did you look over someone's shoulder when you were
learning?


Some people are autodidacts, and some learn better from others.

Reverse-engineering a successful design from your competition
is nothing new. It happens EVERYWHERE in EVERY field of endeavor!

People copy and steal successful designs and ideas in electronics,
painting, music, dance, architecture, automobile design, movies, etc,
etc.....especially when they are starting out, or a company is new.

It's how we learn from each other.

And then when you can IMPROVE on someone else's design, and
make it your own...then YOU become the innovator!

Or as folklorist Charles Seeger put it, "Plagiarism is basic to culture."


Agreed. Apple stole from Xerox, then Microsoft and Nokia stole
from Apple.

Jazz and Blues musicians steal from each other left and right.

I'm not necessarily against Patents, but all industries must
move forward....humanity must advance, patent laws be damned!

[Trevor]

On 17/02/2017 10:31 PM, geoff wrote:
On 17/02/2017 11:27 PM, Paul wrote:
Unsavory practices? Like what, out of curiosity?

Totally ripping off the Mackie 8-Bus, right down to cosmetics.

Rubbish, they improved on it. :-)

Trevor.

[Trevor]

On 18/02/2017 1:32 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
To a much lesser extent, copying much of the design of the Mackie 1604 part
for part. That wasn't anywhere near as blatant, especially since there really
was nothing innovative about the 1604 electronics per se.

But sheesh, if you're going to copy the 1604, at least increase the value
of that feedback capacitor in the mike preamp so the low end response doesn't
change when you adjust the trims....

They did increase the main bus overload margin though :-)

Trevor.

[geoff]

On 18/02/2017 9:07 PM, Trevor wrote:
On 17/02/2017 10:31 PM, geoff wrote:
On 17/02/2017 11:27 PM, Paul wrote:
Unsavory practices? Like what, out of curiosity?

Totally ripping off the Mackie 8-Bus, right down to cosmetics.

Rubbish, they improved on it. :-)

Trevor.



So they scrapped the netlist they generated and re-designed something ?

geoff

[Scott Dorsey]

In article , Paul wrote:
Agreed. Apple stole from Xerox, then Microsoft and Nokia stole
from Apple.

Apple paid a licensing fee to Xerox. Then Microsoft and Nokia lost lawsuits
to Apple.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Scott Dorsey]

geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2017 9:07 PM, Trevor wrote:
On 17/02/2017 10:31 PM, geoff wrote:
On 17/02/2017 11:27 PM, Paul wrote:
Unsavory practices? Like what, out of curiosity?

Totally ripping off the Mackie 8-Bus, right down to cosmetics.

Rubbish, they improved on it. :-)


So they scrapped the netlist they generated and re-designed something ?

Eventually. Their first attempts really were complete knock-offs, but
as they progressed they got more toward actually improving them and making
different products.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Paul[_13_]]

On 2/18/2017 5:06 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
In article , Paul wrote:
Agreed. Apple stole from Xerox, then Microsoft and Nokia stole
from Apple.

Apple paid a licensing fee to Xerox. Then Microsoft and Nokia lost lawsuits
to Apple.

Sure, but the point is that humanity is never creative in isolation.

Whether it's licensed, borrowed, or just flat out stolen, EVERYONE
HAS INFLUENCES AND PEOPLE THEY COPIED FROM, ESPECIALLY AT FIRST.

[Trevor]

On 18/02/2017 11:08 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2017 9:07 PM, Trevor wrote:
On 17/02/2017 10:31 PM, geoff wrote:
On 17/02/2017 11:27 PM, Paul wrote:
Unsavory practices? Like what, out of curiosity?

Totally ripping off the Mackie 8-Bus, right down to cosmetics.

Rubbish, they improved on it. :-)


So they scrapped the netlist they generated and re-designed something ?

Eventually. Their first attempts really were complete knock-offs, but
as they progressed they got more toward actually improving them and making
different products.

Yep, and while I'm not a big fan of Behringer quality in general, they
almost single handedly were responsible for a huge reduction in the
entry cost of small PA and home studio equipment for many people. While
others started getting their equipment manufactured in China and
pocketing most of the savings for themselves, Behringer set about
creating a new market by passing the savings on to the user. This then
forced others to follow suit to some degree, benefiting all users IMO.

Trevor.

[Chuck[_12_]]

On 17 Feb 2017 09:32:02 -0500, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

In article , Paul wrote:
On 2/16/2017 4:42 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Gareth Magennis wrote:

Paul, you will hear a lot of **** from people whose gut response is to hate
Behringer. Do not listen to these people.

Well, you'll hear two kinds of ****:

First of all you'll hear people who complain about the quality of Behringer
products, and I personally can't say much either way about that. As far as
I can tell they make some decent stuff at a price point and they make some
very poor stuff at a price point too. You could say the same about a lot
of manufacturers.

But secondly, you'll hear people who complain about a lot of unsavory
business practices that Behringer engaged in 25 years ago when he was
first getting started.

Unsavory practices? Like what, out of curiosity?

Duplicating Aphex exciters so precisely that they left the Aphex logo on the
new PC boards they made, for instance.

To a much lesser extent, copying much of the design of the Mackie 1604 part
for part. That wasn't anywhere near as blatant, especially since there really
was nothing innovative about the 1604 electronics per se.

But sheesh, if you're going to copy the 1604, at least increase the value
of that feedback capacitor in the mike preamp so the low end response doesn't
change when you adjust the trims....
--scott
The was a company called Earth in the 1970s which made exact copies of
Peavey amplifiers.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

[[email protected]]

On Monday, February 20, 2017 at 10:32:32 AM UTC-5, Chuck wrote:
On 17 Feb 2017 09:32:02 -0500, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

In article , Paul wrote:
On 2/16/2017 4:42 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Gareth Magennis wrote:

Paul, you will hear a lot of **** from people whose gut response is to hate
Behringer. Do not listen to these people.

Well, you'll hear two kinds of ****:

First of all you'll hear people who complain about the quality of Behringer
products, and I personally can't say much either way about that. As far as
I can tell they make some decent stuff at a price point and they make some
very poor stuff at a price point too. You could say the same about a lot
of manufacturers.

But secondly, you'll hear people who complain about a lot of unsavory
business practices that Behringer engaged in 25 years ago when he was
first getting started.

Unsavory practices? Like what, out of curiosity?

Duplicating Aphex exciters so precisely that they left the Aphex logo on the
new PC boards they made, for instance.

To a much lesser extent, copying much of the design of the Mackie 1604 part
for part. That wasn't anywhere near as blatant, especially since there really
was nothing innovative about the 1604 electronics per se.

But sheesh, if you're going to copy the 1604, at least increase the value
of that feedback capacitor in the mike preamp so the low end response doesn't
change when you adjust the trims....
--scott
The was a company called Earth in the 1970s which made exact copies of
Peavey amplifiers.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

EARTH SOUND RESEARCH

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 2/20/2017 10:32 AM, Chuck wrote:
The was a company called Earth in the 1970s which made exact copies of
Peavey amplifiers.

Yeah, but Behringer is still around, stronger than ever, as are Mackie
and Peavey, though Aphex, while still around, seems to be in a rut.

--

For a good time, call http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

[david gourley[_2_]]

Chuck said...news:vs2mache07biuvq73a42p038i6unaqhm0b@
4ax.com:

On 17 Feb 2017 09:32:02 -0500, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

In article , Paul
wrote:
On 2/16/2017 4:42 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Gareth Magennis wrote:

Paul, you will hear a lot of **** from people whose gut response is
to hate
Behringer. Do not listen to these people.

Well, you'll hear two kinds of ****:

First of all you'll hear people who complain about the quality of
Behringer
products, and I personally can't say much either way about that. As
far as
I can tell they make some decent stuff at a price point and they make
some
very poor stuff at a price point too. You could say the same about a
lot
of manufacturers.

But secondly, you'll hear people who complain about a lot of unsavory
business practices that Behringer engaged in 25 years ago when he was
first getting started.

Unsavory practices? Like what, out of curiosity?

Duplicating Aphex exciters so precisely that they left the Aphex logo on
the
new PC boards they made, for instance.

To a much lesser extent, copying much of the design of the Mackie 1604
part
for part. That wasn't anywhere near as blatant, especially since there
really
was nothing innovative about the 1604 electronics per se.

But sheesh, if you're going to copy the 1604, at least increase the value
of that feedback capacitor in the mike preamp so the low end response
doesn't
change when you adjust the trims....
--scott
The was a company called Earth in the 1970s which made exact copies of
Peavey amplifiers.


Right, and I remember those "Plush" amps as well. They almost looked like
Earth knockoffs.

david

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus